ARJUN SINGH Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case when the petitioners were given beatings and some other persons came to save them, at that time, it has been stated that they uttered abuses and somebody used the word "Harijano ka Chamra". On that basis charge under Section 3(1) (10) of S.C.S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has also been framed against the petitioners, even other charges are only of minor offence as such Sections 323, 294, 506 -II, 34, 336 of IPC.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in this case the basic ingredients of Section 3(1) (10) of S.C.S.T. Act which requires intentional humiliation, reads as under: - (x) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view.

(3.) Aforesaid section does not attract for the reason that the fight had not started intentionally by the petitioners with a view to humiliate any person as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Petitioners have also relied upon the judgment delivered by this Court in the case of Santosh Lodha vs. State of M.P. reported in 2011(III) MPWN 59, wherein it has been held that: -